this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
399 points (94.8% liked)

Games

38748 readers
1674 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here and here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Weinstein? Diddy? Epstein?

I think the more apt description would be that when you’re got something that makes other people money, then you will be protected. When that ends you’re fair game.

I also agree that the more money you have the better defence you can get, but I don’t believe laws only apply to the poor. That’s hyperbole.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So the logic is...

The laws only apply to the poor except for exceptions where rich are on their way to poor and can be used as examples of the exception .

[–] dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don’t believe that’s what I said, or at least it wasn’t my intention. I was more trying to highlight that wealthy people (which are not in the way to being poor) will be protected by the people that stand to gain from that protection, not simply for being rich.

I also explicitly said that the justice system does favour the rich, not in a malicious way but more because we have a system that means rich folk can afford more man hours which translates to a better defence.

I want to be clear I’m not defending rich folk here, just being a pedant I guess.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ah yeah we are all pedants here and such while I understand and mostly agree with your comment I now must include.

Uhh, actually we don't have a justice system, we have a legal system.

Haha how dare you out pedant me.

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Weinstein? Diddy? Epstein?

All three of those examples got away with it for literal decades.

Both Weinstein and Diddy were known dangers in their industry.

They took Epstein out because you know he had compromat on Trump. Best friends.

Or - the Cosby shit was an open secret. No one cared until Hannibal Buress started pointing it out.

All three of those examples got away with it for literal decades.

Literally what I’m saying. They got away with it because they had utility for other people and when they no longer did that’s when they get indicted, cause people stop running cover.